Sundara Raj v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Sundara Raj ... Petitioner Vs.
State rep by The Inspector of Police, Pennagaram All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri District.
... Respondent (Crime No.28 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.28 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karthick For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 7, r/w 8, 9(M), 9(f), 10 of POCSO Act in Crime No.28 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed sexual assault on the victim students, who are studying in Class 6 1/4
and the incident was witnessed by other students and immediately it was informed to the school management. Hence, a complaint has been lodged and a case has been registered.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is not a case of sexual assault and due to management dispute a false complaint has been lodged and now the petitioner is not working in the same school. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. I have also gone through the statement recorded from the victim girl and this is not a case of penetrative sexual assault and that the petitioner used to touch the victim girl inappropriately. Hence, I am of the view that custodial interrogation for the purpose of interrogation is not necessary in this case. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
2/4
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Mahila Judge, Dharmapuri, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:
(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; K.RAJASEKAR, J.
ssi (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate 3/4
actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
19.01.2026 ssi To 1.The Mahila Judge, Dharmapuri.
2.The Inspector of Police, Pennagaram All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.OP.No.35806 of 2025 4/4